Outdoor Industry Foundation — News of the Weird?

Bookmark and Share
This post by WildSnow.com blogger  

On June 19th the Outdoor Industry Foundation (OIF) released their Outdoor Recreation Participation Study. The numbers are fascinating, sometimes disturbing — and occasionally ludicrous.

As our first order of business consider the common view of those seeking to close off more backcountry to everyone but muscle powered folks. Lately they’ve been chanting a mantra about how the outdoor recreation industry requires legal Wilderness, and more is always better. Never mind that legal Wilderness shuts out bicycles, and more, according to the OIF study, the vast majority of outdoor recreation does NOT require legal Wilderness.

For example, as is conveniently left out of the OIF Executive Summery, the amount of motorized off-road recreation has exploded: Total off-road outings increased from 600 million in 2003 to 1.2 billion in 2005! And look at the other numbers for outdoor sports that require nothing more than accessible public land that’s not a strip mine: Bicycling, hunting, fishing, and on. As always, this leads me to the conclusion that we need a new land designation. Some sort of “backcountry” that allows roads and bicycles as well as careful resource extraction, but still protects from excessive development such as strip mining.

An aside about motorized recreation: Much of the increase in motorized use, in my opinion, is due to environmentalists shooting themselves in the feet by working like fiends for the past thirty years to restrict backcountry road use (road closures, no new roads, etc.) Ironically, rather than decreasing the amount of backcountry motorized recreation, limited inventory of roads has caused an explosion in the use of ATV type vehicles (“quads”) that can ride what are defined as “trails” less than 50 inches wide, and in reality can be driven nearly anywhere provided the timber is open and the terrain not too steep. When 4×4 autos got restricted, the public embraced quads and they became the modern equivalent of the horse.

While obsessing on their view of roads as the definition of evil, what the enviros didn’t see was the fact that 4-wheel-drive automobiles on roads are way less destructive then swarms of ATVs that can and do ride nearly anywhere. And automobiles are easier to keep on the roads through regulation and physical barriers. What’s weird is that recent raving about defining “roadless” areas here in Colorado continues this trend. Turns out many of the so called “roadless” areas will still allow ATV trails — just no “roads” with those awful Jeeps. Oh well, back to the drawing board on that one.

Let’s move on to other interesting tidbits in the OIF study. While I love backpacking, I’ve always felt it was a self limiting sport. Stumbling through the wilderness with a load on your back (no matter how light) is simply not for everybody. Despite that obvious fact, throughout the last decades quite a bit of land use philosophy has been based on the fear that legal Wilderness would be overrun by backpackers. Sure enough, the OIF study relates the continued trend of backpacking falling in popularity by a dramatic 22.5% over the past eight year period. As compensation, other activities that use more accessible backcountry are on the rise (such as trail running). What’s this mean for land management? Reality is that accessible backcountry land is being overrun by day-trip recreators. Interesting that much of the environmental movement out here in the west still concentrates on “protecting” remote areas that actually appear to need little if any protection, while the close-in places are getting hammered.

Lastly, everyone expects me to comment on the telemark skiing part of the study, so here goes. Those of us involved in the business side of the outdoor industry know that while backcountry skiing isn’t huge, it’s a significant part of the whole deal. Amazingly, the OIF study has nothing about backcountry skiing. Instead, we get a study of telemark skiing, the bulk of which is presumably done at ski resorts, since the study question is simply “Have you gone telemark skiing – downhill with telemark bindings that allow a free-heeled skiing experience?” That focus is fine if you’re simply interested in how many people make a telemark turn or use telemark gear, but since much of telemark skiing is a backcountry sport, one has to ask why the OIF study would give us a ton of info about who went “downhill skiing with telemark bindings,” but tells us zilch about who went backcountry skiing!

As for the telemark numbers, OIF makes some interesting statements. “…Telemark skiing has hovered between 1% and 2% of the total American population 16 years of age or older…for the past two years the total number of Telemark outings has returned to the near all time low number of outings seen in 1998.”

In other words, telemark skiing is a somewhat popular sport, but it’s perhaps reached its peak. (Sports like hunting, at 12% of the +16 population, would be defined as “popular”). One wonders if the fad part of telemark skiing is done, and we’ll now see a leveling of the sport’s popularity as it returns to being viewed as simply one of several ways to enjoy backcountry snow and perhaps make lift skiing more sexy.

Other telemark numbers are also interesting. A whooping 84% of skiers defined as “telemarkers” only telemarked from one to six times over the 2005 season, and the number of those who telemarked eleven or more times is only 10% — which is the population I’d define as the “enthusiasts” who support the industry. And check out the telemark demographic trends: It’s a young person’s sport, with most participants being under 35 years age. And it is somewhat ethnically diverse, OIF says 9% black and 4% Hispanic. But where all those minority telemarkers are skiing is a mystery to me, as I’ve seen and met a few during my travels, but nowhere near those numbers.

More ethnic diversity in our sports is a good thing because it makes them more viable in view of our nation’s changing demographics, not to mention reducing the uncomfortableness of seeing your favorite activities as a bastion of apartheid. But is stating that telemarking skiing has 14% minority participation wishful thinking, and perhaps the result of the Boulder Factor creeping into study (OIF is located in Boulder, Colorado)? One has to wonder. While Boulder is indeed a bastion of enlightened (wishful) thinking, the place is not exactly minority central. Neither is skiing of any variety.

Indeed, a bunch of interesting numbers that at least get us thinking. ¿ Claro ?

Comments

One Response to “Outdoor Industry Foundation — News of the Weird?”

  1. ffelix January 13th, 2007 12:12 pm

    Blaming the enviros exclusively for the OHV hoards is a pretty big stretch & ignores some major drivers.

    Intense & expensive lobbying by manufacturers led to changed legal definitions for these obnoxious machines such that a jet-ski is now classed as a motor boat, & an ATV is classed as a car [one of 2 big reasons there are no more 3-wheelers on the market]. This means that if you attempt to draw up restrictions to control these pestiferous menaces, you have to restrict everybody: the old guy with a small fishing outboard, the road-based jeeper, mountain bikers. Enviros didn’t do this–motorheads did by supporting companies that would rather spend their R&D money on lawsuits than solutions.

    It sucks & the whole thing acts as a feedback loop with those who will not or cannot accept the wholesale motorized trashing of public lands & waterways forced to support widespread Wilderness designation since there is no other choice that will set aside ANY land at all for non-motorized use or wildlife preservation. “Multiple-use”, my ***. Maybe we should just let industry mow the western forests & strip-mine the deserts to see how much the motorjockies like the multiple-use concept when it stamps on their sacred cows for a change.

    Of course, the current utter & complete lack of anything resembling enforcement of existing regs in the west puts the lie even to this extreme action–our “wilderness” is crawling with snowmobiles & ATVs…especially in the accessible areas that can be reached under human-power in a day. Not all Wilderness is remote, & that Wilderness that is…I agree isn’t the issue.

Got something to say? Please do so.





Anti-Spam Quiz:


If you need an emoticon for a comment just copy/paste off the following list, or use text code you might be familiar with.
:D    :-)    :(    :lol:    :x    :P    :oops:    :cry:    :evil:    :twisted:    :roll:    :wink:    :!:    :?:    :idea:    :arrow:   
  
Due to comment spam we moderate most comments. Please do not submit your comment twice -- it will appear shortly after we approve it. Once you've had one comment published, your comments will be pre-approved and appear immediately if you're using the same computer and not blocking browser cookies. NOTE however that ALL comments with one or more links in the text will be held for moderation no matter what, again for spam prevention.
Welcome to Louis (Lou) Dawson's backcountry skiing information opinion website and e magazine. Lou's passion for the past 45 years has been alpinism, climbing, mountaineering and skiing -- along with all manner of outdoor recreation. He has authored numerous books and articles about backcountry skiing and is well known as the first person to ski down all 54 of Colorado's 14,000-foot peaks, otherwise known as the Fourteeners! Books and free back country news and information here, and tons of Randonnee rando telemark info.

All material on this website online magazine is copyrighted, the name WildSnow is trademarked.. Permission required for reproduction, electronic or otherwise. This includes publication and display on other websites by whatever means. PLEASE SEE OUR COPYRIGHT and TRADEMARK INFORMATION.

Backcountry skiing is a dangerous sport. You may be killed or severely injured if you do any form of ski mountaineering, skimo randonnee and randonnée skiing. The information and news on this website is intended only as general information. While the authors and editors of the information on this website make every effort to present useful information about ski mountaineering, due to human error the information, text and images contained within this website may be inaccurate, false, or out-of-date. By using, reading or viewing the information provided on this website, you agree to absolve the owners of Wild Snow as well as content contributors of any liability for injuries or losses incurred while using such information. Furthermore, you agree to use any of this website's information, maps, photos, or binding mounting instructions or templates at your own risk, and waive Wild Snow its owners and contributors of any liability for use of said items for backcountry skiing or any other use.

Switch to our mobile site